Foreign  Religious  Series 


Edited  by 
R.  J.  COOKE,  D.  D. 


First  Sbbies.    i6mo,  cloth.     Each  40  cents,  net. 


THE  VIRGIN  BIRTH 

By  Professor  Richard  H.  Grtltzmacher,  of  the 
University  of  Rostock 

THE  RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Eduard  Riggenbach,  of  the  University 
of  Basle 


THE  SINLESSNESS  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Max  Meyer,  Lie.  Theol.,  Gottberg, 

Germany 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Karl  Beth,  of  the  University 
of  Berlin 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN  AND  THE 

SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS 

By  Professor  Fritz  Barth,  of  the  University 
of  Bern 


NEW  TESTAMENT  PARALLELS  IN 

BUDDHISTIC  LITERATURE 

By   Professor  Karl  Von  Hase,  of  the  University 
of  Breslau 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus 


0^^^^^m^, 


f*      J'.-'.  20  1922      *j 

By 

KARL   BETH 

Professor  in  the  University  of  Berlin 


NEW   YORK:      EATON    &    MAINS 
CINCINNATI:  JENNINGS  &  GRAHAM 


Copyright,  1907,  by 
EATON  &  MAINS. 


I 

Our  Task 

In  every  religion  the  supernatural  affects 
man.  The  religious  man  seeks  to  grasp  the 
supernatural.  But  the  supernatural  repels 
just  as  soon  as  it  obtrudes  itself  in  per- 
ceptible events  and  in  a  measure  unveils  the 
secret.  The  religious  man  sees  himself  in 
the  struggle  of  these  two  tendencies  of  his 
being ;  he  reaches  after  the  supernatural  and 
would  snatch  it,  so  imperfect  does  he  feel 
himself  and  his  world  to  be  without  it ;  but 
when  he  sees  it  he  is  tossed  to  and  fro  by- 
doubts  whether  it  is,  indeed,  the  super- 
natural or  merely  a  delusion. 

The  Christian  religion  connects  one  most 
intimately  with  the  supernatural.  It  reveals 
it.  "Without  controversy,  God  was  manifest 
in  the  flesh."  How  is  the  union  of  the 
earthly  creature  and  the  divine  nature,  of 
God  and  man,  to  be  realized  ?  It  might  ap- 
pear as  impossible  as  the  union  of  water  and 
fire.  Certainly,  when  it  takes  place,  some- 
thing happens  which  lies  beyond  all  calcu- 


6  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

lation,  something  wholly  extraordinary,  a 
miracle.  This  miracle,  which  repeats  itself 
in  every  true  Christian  life,  is  linked  with 
the  life  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, which — apart 
from  any  dogmatical  statement — represents 
the  godly  life  in  its  highest  degree.  The 
life  of  Jesus  is  the  original  miracle  of  Chris- 
tian miracles.  Four  Gospels  record  this  life, 
and  these  narratives  show  traits  in  the  bio- 
graphical portrait,  which  place  the  divine- 
human  being  of  the  founder  of  our  religion, 
in  immediate  relation  to  the  supernatural, 
and  lift  for  us  the  veil  of  mystery.  The 
Gospels  are  filled  with  the  records  of  the 
miracles  of  Jesus.  There  the  supernatural 
projects  into  this  our  world  of  nature  in  a 
solidly  concrete  manner.  In  the  face  of 
these  miracles  the  religious  man  recognizes 
a  twofold  position.  Truly,  he,  on  whom  we 
found  our  religious  life,  from  whom  we  re- 
ceive "grace  for  grace,"  can  authenticate 
himself  as  sent  from  God  by  works  which 
no  other  can  do.  And  yet  does  it  harmonize 
with  the  idea  of  the  Redeemer  who  intended 
to  seek  souls  and  lead  them  to  God,  to  inter- 
fere by  means  of  miracles  with  the  orderly 
course  of  the  world?    Is  not  such  miracle- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  7 

working  written  on  anotlier  page  than  that 
of  prophetical  soul-saving  ministry?  Is  not 
this  trait  so  foreign  to  his  otherwise  known 
nature  that  pious  contemplation  might  have 
rather  ascribed  it  to  him  afterward?  And, 
should  Christianity  in  this  matter  move  along 
the  same  line  as  many  other  religions  in 
whose  traditions  miraculous  deeds  are  also 
assigned  to  their  founders  and  heroes,  but 
the  reality  of  w^hich  criticism  can  by  no 
means  admit?  The  history  of  religion 
brings  before  us  a  great  mass  of  marvelous 
legends.  This  uniformity  in  religious 
traditions  seems  to  point  first  of  all  to  the 
fact  that  human  need  always  led  it  to 
ascribe  miraculous  deeds  to  religious  heroes, 
and  that  the  same  is  also  the  case  with  the 
miracles  of  Jesus. 

The  assertion  is  indeed  very  often  made 
that  Jesus  did  not  perform  real  miracles, 
that  is,  acts  which  could  not  have  been  pos- 
sible in  the  usual  course  of  natural  events. 
It  is  true  that  not  all  the  remarkable  cures 
of  which  the  Gospels  speak  are  questioned, 
but  they  are  only  admitted  in  so  far  as  they 
stand  in  direct  analogy  to  that  class  of  psy- 
chical cures,  which  are  also  accomplished 


8  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

among  us  by  suggestion,  therapeutics,  or 
magnetism.  Thus  the  cures  of  Jesus  appear 
only  as  psychical  influences  produced  by  his 
strong  personality,  but  which,  on  this  ac- 
count, cannot  be  declared  miraculous.  Thus, 
from  this  point  of  view,  every  real  miracle  is 
rejected. 

But  let  us  see  whether  this  estimate  of  the 
gospel  miracles  is  necessary.  The  question 
is  an  historical  one.  One  can  decide  against 
the  reality  of  each  miracle  performed  by 
Jesus  without  previously  denying  the  possi- 
bility of  miracles.  The  question  of  the  pos- 
sibility of  the  miraculous  is  entirely  differ- 
ent from  that  of  its  historicity,  especially  of 
the  miracles  of  Jesus.  Leaving  aside  the 
question  of  possibility,  we  may  try  to  answer 
the  question:  "What  can  be  said  of  the 
reality  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  on  the  basis 
of  an  historical  consideration  of  the 
records?"  Two  points  require  our  atten- 
tion. In  the  first  place,  we  may  inquire 
whether  the  working  of  miracles  belongs  to 
the  personality  of  Jesus ;  that  Is,  whether  the 
Messianic  calling  to  establish  the  kingdom  of 
God  and  to  give  to  men  a  reconciled  God 
included  miraculous  deeds.     In  the  second 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  9 

place,  the  points  In  question  are  the  historical 
instances  which  set  forth  the  reality  of  the 
miracles  of  Jesus.  Here  rellglo-hlstorical 
analogies,  which  seem  to  deprive  the  mira- 
cles of  Jesus  of  their  specific  position  and 
importance,  as  well  as  of  their  reality,  have 
above  all  things  to  be  taken  into  account. 
Our  question  also  reads,  whether  the 
miracles  of  Jesus  occupy  a  peculiar  position 
over  against  the  other  miracles  in  the  hlstor}-- 
of  religion  or  whether  they  occupy  the  same 
position. 


II 

What  Jesus  Says  of  the  Meaning  of 
His  Miracles 

Do  THE  miracles  of  Jesus  accord  with  his 
Hfe  and  work?  This  is  the  first  question. 
This  query  may  be  answered  most  posi- 
tively by  placing  in  the  center  of  our  con- 
sideration the  copious  testimonies  which  the 
Lord  himself  has  given  concerning  his  won- 
drous deeds.  The  discourses  of  Jesus  reveal 
the  purport  of  his  person,  and  the  closer 
they  follow  the  work  of  the  person  the  more 
valuable  they  become.  If  we  can  ascertain 
what  Jesus  himself  thought  of  his  miracles, 
it  will  be  at  the  same  time  clear  whether 
miracles  stand  in  a  positive  or  negative  re- 
lation to  his  character. 

We  repeatedly  read  in  the  Gospels  that 
the  contemporaries  of  Jesus  believed  on  him 
because  of  his  miracles.  This,  at  any  rate, 
seems  to  suggest  that  the  evangelist  also  oc- 
cupied this  position,  that  miracles  were  an 
excellent  means  for  awakening  faith,  and 
that   for   this  purpose   Jesus   himself  per- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  ii 

formed  his  miracles.  The  three  synoptists 
and  the  Gospel  of  John  agree  in  such  ex- 
pressions. In  John  II.  45,  we  read  after 
the  raising  of  Lazarus :  "Then  many  of  the 
Jews  which  came  to  Mary,  and  had  seen  the 
things  which  Jesus  did,  believed  on  him." 
Some,  however,  went  to  the  Pharisees  and 
embarrassed  them  by  reporting  the  event 
(comp.  John  2.  22^;  7.  26-31).  After  the 
healing  of  the  blind  and  dumb,  the  people 
seriously  considered  the  question,  "Is  not 
this  the  son  of  David?"  (Matt.  12.  23; 
comp.  9.  ^^,  seq.)  In  like  manner  again  the 
fourth  evangelist  when  recording  the  miracle 
at  Cana,  says:  Jesus  "manifested  forth  his 
glory;  and  his  disciples  believed  on  him" 
(John  2.  11).  But  there  are  not  wanting 
clearly  expressed  statements  that  the  mira- 
cles themselves  as  such,  were  not  able  to 
hold  the  people  to  Jesus.  Not  only  swoni 
opponents  know  how  to  invalidate  the  sig- 
nificance of  such  signs ;  even  the  enthusiastic 
multitude  makes  the  very  feeding  which  it 
itself  witnessed,  a  reason  for  turning  its 
back  upon  the  Master  when  further  expecta- 
tions remain  unfulfilled  (John  6.  66). 
Jesus,  however,  thinks  otherwise.     His 


12  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

miracles  were  not  to  be  a  condition  for  the 
faith  of  men.  They  are  not  intended  in  the 
least  to  excite  faith.  On  the  contrary,  Jesus 
aims  at  nothing  more  than  to  distract  at- 
tention from  his  miraculous  deeds.  We  may 
understand  this  fact  correctly  only  by  con- 
sidering the  peculiarity  of  his  calling  and 
the  relation  into  which  he  was  brought 
thereby  to  his  countrymen.  He  knew  him- 
self as  the  Messiah  for  whom  his  people  were 
eagerly  looking.  He  saw  in  himself  the 
realization  of  Israel's  religious  hopes.  But, 
at  the  same  time,  he  knew  himself  to  be  in 
the  keenest  opposition  to  popular  expecta- 
tions. He  was  the  Messiah,  and  he  was  not. 
He  was  the  Messiah  in  the  real  meaning  of 
God's  plan ;  yet  he  did  not  resemble  the  con- 
ception which  the  people  had  of  the  Messiah. 
He  brought  the  highest  good  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  the  good  of  consummation.  The 
people  expected  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
and  that  the  manifestation  of  his  benefits 
would  be  accompanied  with  great  signs  and 
powerful  deeds.  The  Messiah  was  to  play  a 
brilliant  part  and  to  authenticate  himself  by 
incomparable  miracles;  "With  an  iron  rod" 
was  he  to  shake  off  and  abase  all  enemies  of 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  13 

Israel,  the  Romans  as  well  as  the  Herodians. 
It  is  the  tragic  element  which  runs  through 
the  life  of  Jesus  that  while  wide  circles  of 
the  people  would  acknowledge  him  as  the 
Messiah,  they  could  not  recognize  him  as 
such  because  of  that  erroneous  expectation. 
During  the  whole  period  of  his  captivity  he 
had  to  struggle  with  this  false  Messianic 
idea ;  and  he  rejected  those  who  clung  only 
to  his  mighty  deeds  because  through  them 
their  fancy  was  strengthened.  The  inner 
struggle  was  hard.  The  temptation  was 
present  to  respond  to  the  expectation  of  the 
people  by  showing  himself  in  power;  to 
summon  more  than  ten  thousand  legions  of 
angels.  He  decided  against  this  method  of 
asserting  his  Messianic  call.  He  might 
thereby  perhaps  have  advanced  his  fame 
but  he  would  have  missed  his  calling ;  for  in 
this  way  he  would  have  wholly  confined  the 
people  to  the  worldly  and  the  human,  and 
would  not  have  changed  or  gained  their 
hearts. 

The  synoptists  introduce  the  ministry  of 
Jesus  with  the  narrative  which  brings  be- 
fore us  this  struggle  of  Jesus.  In  the  form 
of  a  program  he  there  expresses  himself  with 


14  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

respect  to  his  calling.  The  history  of  the 
Temptation  tells  us  with  what  decision  from 
the  very  start,  conscious  of  the  only  true 
path,  he  refused  from  principle  every  per- 
formance of  a  miraculous  exhibition.  To  do 
this  would  have  answered  the  expectation 
of  the  people  who  longed  for  a  Messiah  who 
brought  about  the  kingdom  of  God  full  of 
blessing  with  a  magic  stroke  by  establishing 
an  outward  power,  to  suddenly  make  an  end 
to  all  care  of  the  earthly  life  and  all  distress 
caused  by  political  oppression.  But  nothing 
of  the  kind  lies  in  the  purpose  of  Jesus !  The 
kingdom  of  God  comes  not  wath  observation. 
This  he  manifested  unto  the  end. 

We  see  him  going  through  the  country  of 
Galilee  relieving  distress,  spreading  blessings. 
He  cured  a  blind  man  who  also  was  dumb. 
His  opponents  did  not  consider  this  cure 
as  a  sign  of  his  divine  origin.  They  rather 
ask  now  for  a  sign  as  a  proof  that  that  cure 
was  not  caused  by  the  devil  dwelling  in  him 
(Matt.  12.  38-45).  Jesus  agrees  with  his 
adversaries  in  one  point:  a  miracle,  be  it 
never  so  surprising,  cannot  be  considered  a 
sign  that  one  is  sent  from  God.  This  we 
infer  from  his  subsequent  words.    At  the 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  15 

same  time,  however,  he  vehemently  addresses 
the  representatives  of  the  hierarchy:  "An 
evil  and  adulterous  generation  (that  is,  ac- 
cording to  prophetical  phraseology ;  a  gener- 
ation which  apostatized  from  the  marriage 
covenant  with  God)  seeketh  after  a  sign" 
(Matt.  12.  39)  ;  that  is,  a  sign  which  shall 
be  self-evidencing  that  the  performer  of  it 
is  God.  Those  people  desired  to  see  some 
sudden  phenomenon,  a  "sign  from  heaven" 
(Matt.  16.  i).  The  Messiahship  was  to  be 
ascertained  from  something  more  wonderful 
than  an  extraordinary  cure  of  a  disease.  The 
kingdom  of  God  is  not  to  be  established  by 
the  spirit  of  Jesus,  not  by  the  gospel  and 
repentance.  Jesus  judges  their  eagerness  as 
the  manifestation  of  a  mania  for  miracles, 
which  is  an  obstacle  to  faith.  What  kind  of 
faith  would  that  be  which  would  thus  be 
called  forth !  A  sign  was  to  take  place  which 
makes  faith  superfluous  by  demanding  an 
apparently  physical  interference  of  God  in 
the  human  world,  a  sign  which  obtains  the 
"faith"  by  force.  A  generation,  with  such  a 
mania  for  miracles,  is  "adulterous,"  is  too 
far  from  God  that  it  should  turn  inwardly 
to  God,  even  in  consequence  of  the  greatest 


i6  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

miracle;  therefore  "no  sign  shall  be  given 
to  it,  but  the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas." 

What  is  to  be  understood  by  the  sign  of 
Jonas?  The  Gospel  of  Matthew  referred 
the  words  to  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  and 
put  this  interpretation  into  the  mouth  of 
Jesus  himself.  But  this  resurrection  which 
(as  verse  40  states)  did  not  take  place  after 
three  days  and  three  nights,  but  after  two 
nights  and  one  day — was  it  really  meant 
by  Jesus  to  be  the  infallible  sign  of  his 
Messiahship?  In  reality  it  had  not  become 
such  a  sign.  It  did  not  take  place  so  pub- 
licly that  the  adulterous  generation  believed 
thereby;  in  fact  that  generation  did  not  re- 
ceive that  sign  at  all,  but  those  only  who  be- 
lieved in  God.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
in  verse  40  we  have  the  opinion  of  the 
evangelist  before  us,  or,  rather,  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  word  of  Jesus  handed  down  to 
him.  This  becomes  evident  from  the  other 
Gospel  account  of  this  event.  In  the  narra- 
tive of  Luke  (11.  30),  the  point  of  com- 
parison is  given  differently.  As  Jonas  be- 
came a  sign  to  the  Ninevites,  so  the  Son  of 
man  shall  be  to  this  generation.  The  pro- 
phet Jonas,  however,  became  to  the  inhabit- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  17 

ants  of  the  eastern  city  a  purely  spiritual 
sign,  appropriated  not  so  much  through 
some  physical  happening  but,  rather,  through 
the  power  of  the  Spirit.  Jonah's  courageous 
preaching  of  repentance  and  its  powerful 
success  proved  his  divine  commission.  In 
this  way  the  God-estranged  generation  is  to 
be  overcome.  Thus  Jesus,  in  his  personality 
and  call  to  repentance  and  pledge  of  salva- 
tion, will  also  be  the  sign  appointed  for  this 
generation.  It  is  by  no  means  necessary  to 
think  of  a  near  or  distant  future  when  this 
sign  shall  take  place.  It  is,  rather,  meant 
that  this  very  sign  is  already  present  and  is 
given  now ;  and  that  hereafter  no  other  sign 
shall  be  given  than  this,  just  as  the  Old 
Testament  prophet  gave  it  to  the  heathenish 
city. 

A  beautiful  parallel  to  this  word  of  Jesus 
is  the  parable  of  the  obedient  and  disobedi- 
ent sons  together  with  its  explanation  (Matt. 
21.  23-32).  The  parable  is  an  answer  to  the 
question,  'By  what  authority  was  Jesus 
teaching  the  people  ?  Jesus  refused  a  direct 
answer  because  "the  elders"  did  not  reply  to 
his  question  as  to  whence  the  Baptist  received 
his  authority.     Now  he  says  the  call  to  re- 


1 8  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

pentance  of  the  Baptist  was  made  in  order 
to  bring  about  a  change  of  heart.  In  their 
attitude  toward  him  the  scribes  resemble 
the  disobedient  son  who  at  first  promised  to 
obey  his  father,  but  afterward  thinks  other- 
wise and  will  not  listen  to  the  (now  in 
Jesus)  repeated  voice  of  the  father.  But 
the  sinners  who  follow  Jesus  and  are  in- 
wardly changed  are  lilce  the  son  who  at  first 
refuses  obedience  and  afterward  repents  and 
returns  home.  Here,  too,  the  thought  is 
decisive,  that  it  does  not  require  an  extra- 
ordinary sign  to  convince  man  of  the  near- 
ness of  God ;  the  call  of  repentance  ought  to 
have  shown  to  all  that  God  is  at  the  door. 
Thus  also  is  it  with  the  attitude  of  men 
toward  Jesus.  "By  what  authority"  he 
acts,  and  whether  he  is  the  revealed  of  God, 
is  to  be  inferred  from  his  presence  and  his 
teaching. 

The  continuation  of  the  address  of  Jesus 
proves  that  the  statement  concerning  the 
sign  of  Jonas,  according  to  Matthew,  not- 
withstanding the  interpretation  given  in  the 
text,  must  not  be  understood  of  a  certain 
miraculous  act.  When  the  people  of  Nine- 
veh, because  they  repented  at  the  preaching 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  19 

of  Jonas,  shall,  as  it  were,  rise  up  in  the 
judgment  against  the  Jewish  scribes  at  the 
general  resurrection  (verse  42),  the  salient 
point  is  that  the  sign  for  them  is  the  preach- 
ing of  repentance.  This  characteristic  fea- 
ture of  the  sending  of  Jonas,  Jesus  applies 
to  his  position  in  Israel.  When  a  plain 
prophet  already  made  such  an  impression 
and  became  a  credible  sign,  how  much  more 
must  every  open  heart  see  in  Jesus,  in  him, 
the  Sinless  One,  the  sign  from  heaven;  for 
"here  is  a  greater  than  Jonas."  How  often, 
of  his  work  from  which  alone  man  can  infer 
as  here,  Jesus  refers  to  the  uniform  totality 
his  sign  of  the  Messiahship!  He  will  not 
perform  a  miraculous  feat  in  order  to  ac- 
quire acknowledgment  at  least,  where  curi- 
osity, superstition,  or  even  unbelief  looks 
for  it.  He  states  clearly  that  those  are  in 
error  and  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God  who 
seek  a  manifestation  of  God  in  miraculous 
phenomena.  The  manifestation,  rather,  ac- 
complishes itself  in  history,  in  the  mental, 
historical  life  of  humanity.  There  the 
honest-hearted  will  perceive  the  signs  of 
God.  Expressive  of  severe  judgment  on 
those  having  a  mania  for  miracles,  Christ 


20  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

tells  us  that  prodigies,  as  a  means  of  awak- 
ening faith,  are  not  to  be  thought  of.  We 
see  Jesus  here  intentionally  diverting  atten- 
tion from  all  kinds  of  magic,  every  kind  of 
fetichism,  everything  carnal  in  religion. 
The  spiritual  element  of  the  religion  found- 
ed by  him  is  emphasized  in  that  God  and 
his  will  may  be  known  in  the  sphere  of  the 
spiritual.  What  one  understands  by  the 
miracles  of  Jesus,  wherever  one  occurs  is 
not  to  be  connected  with  the  intention  to  es- 
tablish religion  or  reveal  God;  all  this  be- 
longs not  to  the  "sign"  which  humanity 
must  regard,  in  order  to  know  by  what  au- 
thority Jesus  spoke  and  acted. 

The  peculiarity  of  Jesus's  conception  of 
his  miracles  is  thus  sufficiently  clear.  The 
object  of  his  life  is  this :  to  prepare  men  for 
his  gospel  and  to  lead  them  to  God  by  in- 
fluencing their  minds.  For  this  purpose  his 
miracles  are  not  conducible,  for  he  knows 
very  well  that  by  them  no  sinful  men  be- 
come godly,  and  no  atheist  a  believer  in 
God.  To  this  deep  discerner  of  man  the 
way  of  human  reason  which  tries  to  explain 
to  itself  by  natural  means  even  the  problems 
of  the  supernatural,  is  not  unknown.     The 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  21 

natural  man  seeks  after  natural  causes  and 
does  not  reason  from  the  miracle  to  the 
supernatural  agent  of  the  miracle.  Even 
the  "greatest"  miracle — the  resurrection  of 
the  dead — will  not  be  accepted.  Reason  will 
seek  for  secret  mundane  causes  and  will  find 
them.  This  very  case  Jesus  emphasizes  by- 
supplying  the  critique  on  all  spiritualistic 
longing  in  the  parable  of  Lazarus  and  the 
rich  man :  If  men  believe  not  the  living  word 
and  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  will  not  believe, 
though  one  rose  from  the  dead  (Luke  16. 
31).  He  only  will  be  able  to  perceive  in  the 
miracles  a  deed  of  God  who  is  already  con- 
vinced of  God's  power  and  work.  For  this 
reason  Jesus  performs  no  miracles  for  un- 
believers. For  such  his  miracles  would  only 
provoke  indifference  and  hardness  of  heart. 
These  thoughts  we  find  in  many  expres- 
sions of  Jesus.  Considei",  for  example,  his 
coming  to  his  home  city  of  Nazareth,  as 
Luke  describes  it  (4.  23-27).  The  unbe- 
lieving people  have  asked  him  to  do  before 
their  eyes  the  same  deeds  as  in  Capernaum ; 
but  he  refuses,  and  refers  to  Elias  and  Eli- 
seus,  who  did  not  use  the  God-given  power 
for  miraculous  help  among  Jews,  but  be- 


22  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

stowed  it  upon  two  non-Israelites  who,  by 
their  faith,  were  truly  qualified  to  receive 
the  blessing.  Or,  let  us  take  the  answer  to 
the  question  of  the  Baptist,  in  which  he  em- 
phasizes the  Messianic  character  of  his  ac- 
tivity, and  mentions  miracles  only  in  con- 
nection with  the  founding  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom,  and  subordinates  them  to  his 
preaching  (Matt.  ii.  2-6).  He  designates 
his  activity  as  that  of  the  promised  Messiah, 
and  refers  to  the  Messianic  time  as  predict- 
ed by  Isaiah.  Events  of  a  wondrous  nature 
have  come  to  pass,  but  the  miraculous  ele- 
ment in  them  is  not  the  main  thing,  but  the 
result :  that  misery  ceases  when  God's  hand 
is  stretched  out  in  mercy  and  tenderness. 
Thus  those  miracles  come  into  question  only 
as  elements  in  the  preaching  of  salvation, 
and  this  is  also  indicated  in  the  answer  of 
Jesus  when  he  commanded  them  to  "Go  and 
show  John  again  those  things  which  ye  do 
hear  and  see."  God's  kingdom  of  blessing 
comes  through  the  joyful  message  of  Jesus, 
which  preaching,  however,  is  accompanied 
by  distinctive  characteristics  of  the  happy 
state  which  is  yet  to  be  restored  in  God's 
world. 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  23 

In  a  more  decided  manner  is  the  working 
of  miracles  subordinated  to  that  of  preaching 
in  Mark  i.  33-39.  At  Capernaum  in  the 
evening,  Jesus  healed  many  sick  people. 
With  the  first  early  dawn  he  retires  from 
the  city  to  a  solitary  place  for  prayer.  His 
disciples,  led  by  Peter,  follow  after  him, 
and,  finding  him,  wish  to  bring  him  back 
to  the  city,  as  the  inhabitants  were  seeking 
him.  And  he?  "Let  us  go  into  the  next 
towns,  that  I  may  preach  there  also :  for 
therefore  came  I  forth."  Luke,  who  de- 
scribes more  fully  this  event  (4.  42-44), 
makes  him  say  still  plainer  that  his  life's 
object  was  none  other  than  the  preaching  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  According  to  thiF 
account  the  multitude  itself  had  come  tc 
Jesus  and  urged  him  not  to  depart  from 
them;  but  he  tells  them  plainly:  "I  must 
preach  the  kingdom  of  God  to  other  cities 
also ;  for  therefore  am  I  sent." 

All  this  proves  that  Jesus  considered  his 
miraculous  power  not  as  something  inde- 
pendent of  his  call  to  repentance  and  the 
kingdom  of  God,  nor  did  he  wish  it  to  be 
considered  as  such.  In  estimate  and  value 
as  they  easily  appear  at  a  superficial  glance 


24  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

in  the  synoptic  Gospels,  miracles  are  of  little 
importance.  Jesus  himself  does  not  con- 
sider them  as  the  quintessence  of  his  work. 
Nevertheless,  according  to  our  records,  he 
so  readily  demonstrated  his  divinity  by  his 
miracles  that  the  granting  of  the  same  must 
have  been  of  decisive  importance  to  him. 
Indeed,  Jesus  did  not  consider  his  miracles 
as  a  superfluous  element  of  his  appearance, 
but,  as  the  answer  to  the  Baptist  already 
showed,  they  were  for  him  an  important  ele- 
ment in  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
as  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  on  the  occasion  on 
which  he  rebuked  those  who  were  seeking 
signs  he  again  refers  to  his  works  (Matt. 
C2.  33,  seq. ;  Luke  ii.  14,  seq.).  Miraculous 
:ures  were  not  uncommon  or  unexpected 
among  those  people;  there  were  some  who 
boasted  of  such  arts  and  were  occasionally 
successful ;  hence,  it  was  no  sign  of  his  Mes- 
siahship  for  the  prejudiced  opponents  of 
Jesus  when  he  cured  one  who  was  "blind 
and  deaf"  by  casting  out  his  demon.  We 
are  told  that  the  multitude  preferred,  rather, 
the  inference  as  to  his  Davidic  sonship,  that 
is,  his  Messiahship ;  the  Pharisees,  however, 
opposed  it  by  saying:  "He  casts  out  the 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  25 

demons  not  with  the  help  of  God,  but  as  an 
associate  of  the  head  of  the  devils,  the  lord 
of  the  kingdom  of  demons."  Over  against 
this  accusation  Jesus  proves  the  absurdity  of 
such  a  charge,  since  he  would  thus  destroy 
the  kingdom  itself  with  which  he  is  in  league. 
This  being  impossible,  he  can  only  act 
through  the  Spirit  of  God;  and  where  de- 
mons are  cast  out  there  the  kingdom  of  God 
has  come  unto  men  (Matt.  12.  28). 

In  this  way  Jesus  manifests  his  match- 
less activity  against  the  powers  of  dark- 
ness as  part  of  his  divine  plan;  not  that 
faith  in  his  divinity  would  be  weakened 
by  such  intervention,  but  that  the  powers 
of  evil  should  thereby  be  restrained  and 
the  way  prepared  for  the  government  of 
God.  All  his  cures  may  be  regarded 
from  the  same  point  of  view.  The  cure 
of  the  man  sick  of  the  palsy  (Mark  2. 
3-13),  with  its  pointed  reference  to  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  is  an  illustration.  The  proceed- 
ings on  this  occasion  could,  indeed,  soonest 
make  the  impression  that  Jesus  performed  a 
miraculous  cure  in  order  that  unbelievers 
also  might  acknowledge  his  divine  mission; 
but  such  is  not  the  case,  for  we  find  not  the 


26  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

least  indication  that  the  cure  produced  faith 
among  the  scribes;  and  the  events  them- 
selves, notwithstanding  verse  lo,  allow  not 
the  opinion  that  Jesus  intended  to  awaken 
the  faith  of  the  incredulous.  Here,  as  else- 
where, he  promised  to  the  sick  the  forgive- 
ness of  his  sins.  The  hierarchs  looked  upon 
it  as  blasphemy.  To  purge  himself  from  this 
reproof  he  suggests  to  those  people  their 
judgment  on  the  bodily  cure  now  to  be  ac- 
complished, namely,  that  he  cannot  only 
promise  something  whose  actual  occurrence 
cannot  be  controlled  by  men,  but  also  some- 
thing which  at  once  must  either  prove  itself 
valid  or  invalid.  He  could  have  cured  the 
sick  man  without  this  illustration  of  his 
work  which  was  provoked  by  his  adver- 
saries, for  not  to  heal  was  wholly  against  his 
custom.  The  circumstances,  however,  of- 
fered at  this  time  the  opportunity  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  connection  of  his  preaching  of 
the  kingdom  with  the  conveyance  of  earthly 
blessing. 

Answering  this  conception  of  the  Mes- 
sianic calling,  Jesus  combined  with  it  the 
works  of  divine  love  and  mercy.  As  Jesus 
decidedly  expressed  himself  against  the  as- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  27 

sumption  that  eveiy  particular  disease  is  a 
consequence  of  a  sin,  so  also  was  he  con- 
vinced that  there  did  exist  a  general  organic 
connection  between  physical  evil  and  religio- 
moral  deficiency.  The  latter  is  perceived  as 
the  real  cause  of  the  depth  of  the  physical 
sphere.  Moral  deficiency  exercises  a  gener- 
ally degenerating  influence,  analogous  to 
the  depressing  effect  which  the  sinking  of 
the  spiritual  level  of  a  person  exercises  upon 
his  entire  embodiment.  That  defect  in  the 
domain  of  the  human  nature  is  a  sequence 
of  apostasy  from  God,  hereditary  in  hu- 
manity; a  sequence  thereof,  that  men  deny 
their  God-relationship  by  their  practical  life 
and  effort,  comes  out  in  the  teaching  and 
working  of  Jesus.  It  was,  therefore,  in  the 
interest  of  his  calling  to  remove,  in  the  first 
place,  the  distress  of  souls,  and  at  the  same 
time  also  to  abolish  the  bodily  misery  or- 
ganically connected  with  this  distress  of  the 
soul.  Jesus  was  inwardly  moved  to  help 
physically  where  he  helped  spiritually;  and 
this  doubly  apparent  wondrous  help  is  noth- 
ing else  than  the  immediate  practical  proof 
of  the  divine  will  of  love.  As  often  as  the 
Father    moved     him     Jesus     showed     his 


28  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

divinely  helping  love.  Helping  and  bless- 
ing, saving  and  redeeming,  his  mercy  inter- 
posed also  in  the  outward  life  of  individuals. 
Not  only  healing  diseases,  raising  the  dead, 
feeding  the  multitude,  but,  in  general,  all 
the  miracles  which  he  performed  were  ema- 
nations of  this  compassion  over  spiritual 
wretchedness,  which  inclined  to  bodily  dis- 
tress in  order  to  completely  finish  its  work. 
Let  us  look  back!  Jesus  came  to  found 
the  kingdom  of  God;  to  lead  men  into  it, 
and  thus  bring  them  to  a  voluntary  sub- 
mission to  God's  government.  The  proper 
means  for  that  is  the  preaching  of  glad 
tidings  which  only  he  can  accept  whose  heart 
is  changed,  whose  mind  is  directed  toward 
repentance.  But  it  belongs  to  the  Messianic 
task  to  overcome  not  only  the  ethico-re- 
ligious  wretchedness  of  remoteness  from 
God  and  of  being  forsaken  by  God,  but  also 
physical  natural  misery  in  its  different 
forms.  This  natural  suffering  Jesus  re- 
gards as  the  disorder  of  the  divinely  ar- 
ranged relations  in  the  human  world,  in 
which  Satan's  rule  has  entered.  The  com- 
plete victory  of  God  belongs,  indeed,  to  the 
future;  but  the  blows  which  Jesus  strikes 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  29 

the  power  of  darkness  are  an  earnest  and 
pledge  of  the  world's  renovation.  So  far 
as  saving  miracles  are  signs,  they  are  not 
such  for  the  divine  authority  of  Jesus,  but 
only  of  the  love  of  the  heavenly  Father  and 
the  coming  of  his  kingdom. 

This  ethico-religious  regeneration  is  not 
merely  the  more  important  element  in  the 
endeavor  of  Jesus;  it  is  also  the  essential 
preliminary  condition  for  the  effectuation  of 
the  love  which  shows  itself  in  Jesus's  mira- 
cles of  mercy.  His  miracles  can  only  take 
place  where  there  is  a  disposition  toward 
God,  or  has  at  least  commenced.  No  mira- 
cle is  done  to  break  unbelief;  but  where  it 
is  broken,  God's  power  is  visible.  For  an 
extraordinary  physical  event  has  never  the 
ability  to  convince  men  who  are  lacking  in 
religious  and  moral  willingness;  and,  be- 
cause miracles,  on  the  one  hand,  are  the  ac- 
cessory phenomena  of  the  Messianic  work, 
and  on  the  other,  must  remain  unintelligible 
to  unbelief,  Jesus  never  referred  to  them, 
properly  speaking.  Connected  with  this  is 
the  fact  that  by  no  means  did  he  think 
miraculous  power  "as  robbery,"  the  posses- 
sion of  which  he  alone  had  to  secure.    Being 


30  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

conscious  of  possessing  it  in  consequence  of 
his  immediate  communion  with  God,  he  was 
not  afraid  to  convey  it  to  everyone  who,  hke 
him,  Hves  in  the  will  of  God.  This  trait 
makes  clear  anew  the  difference  between  the 
Llessiahship  and  the  miraculous  power  of 
Jesus;  the  former  belonged  to  him  exclu- 
sively. When  thinking  of  it  he  emphasized 
his  person  as  unique  which,  unlike  anyone 
else,  stands  in  essential  connection  with  God. 
He  and  he  alone  has  to  bring  the  glad  tid- 
ings. He  and  he  alone  can  give  remission 
of  sins  and  establish  the  kingdom  of  God. 
But  the  power  of  working  miracles  he  gave 
to  undefiled  faith  generally.  Where  there 
is  a  man  who  in  every  moment  is  absolutely 
sure  of  his  God — to  whom,  indeed,  also 
absolutely  moral  purity  belongs — there  "all 
things  are  possible"  (Mark  9.  23). 

Thus  far  we  have  purposely  followed  only 
the  synoptic  tradition.  The  Johannean  rec- 
ord requires  a  separate  treatment,  because 
it  may  seem  and  it  has  been  repeatedly  af- 
firmed, that  John  and  the  Johannean  Jesus 
ascribed  to  miracles  a  far  greater  and  at  the 
same  time,  a  more  external  importance. 
The  objectors  to   the  genuineness   of  the 


The  Miracles  of  Jesu  31 

fourth  Gospel  freely  emphasize  the  fact 
that  the  Johannean  Jesus,  as  distinguished 
from  the  synoptic,  makes  much  of  his  per- 
son and  his  miracles ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
indeed  that  we  have  here  statements  of 
Jesus  concerning  his  miracles  which  read 
entirely  different.  Was  it  impossible  to  as- 
sign to  the  synoptic  Jesus  the  idea  that  his 
miraculous  power  should  or  only  could, 
awaken  belief  in  man?  In  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel more  than  once  we  hear  from  the  mouth 
of  Jesus  that  his  miraculous  deeds  were  to 
serve  Revelation  and  Faith.  Thus  (John 
9.  3)  before  healing  the  man  who  was  born 
blind  Jesus  says  that  his  blindness  is  not  in 
consequence  of  sin,  either  of  the  parents  or 
of  the  sufferer  himself,  but  in  order  that 
"the  works  of  God  should  be  made  manifest 
in  him,"  and  at  once.  Jesus  puts  his  healing 
ministry  parallel  with  his  ministry  of  en- 
lightening the  world.  At  the  report  of  the 
sickness  of  his  friend,  Lazarus,  he  says  to 
the  disciples :  "This  sickness  Is  not  unto 
death,  but  for  the  glory  of  God,  that  the 
Son  of  God  might  be  glorified  thereby." 
When  he  hears  of  his  death  he  says  to  his 
disciples:  "I  am  glad  for  your  sakes  that  I 


32  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

was  not  there,  to  the  intent  ye  may  believe" 
(John  II.  15),  Before  the  raising  of 
Lazarus  he  openly  thanks  God  because  of 
the  people  which  stood  by  (verse  42)  "that 
they  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me." 

Have  we  here,  indeed,  a  different  con- 
ception of  the  importance  of  the  miracles 
than  in  the  synoptists?  This  question  can 
not  be  answered  by  considering  the  quoted 
words  alone;  we  can  only  decide  upon  it 
when  other  Johannean  words  of  Jesus  on 
miracles  are  also  considered.  Nevertheless, 
something  can  be  stated  here.  Jesus  does 
not  say  that  by  this  miraculous  cure  his 
divine  glory  should  be  manifest,  but  that 
"the  works  of  God"  should  be  brought  near 
to  men.  And  the  further  connection  of  the 
thought  proves  irrefutably  that  the  funda- 
mental conception  of  Jesus,  as  to  the  place 
of  his  miracles,  according  to  the  Johannean 
account,  is  none  other  than  that  of  the 
synoptists.  For  the  miraculous  cure  is  in- 
cluded in  the  works  of  God  which  latter,  ac- 
cording to  verses  4  and  5,  are  just  the  works 
which  Jesus  does  in  order  to  fulfill  his  call- 
ing as  the  Light  of  the  world;  or,  as  it 
might  be  expressed  according  to  the  synop- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  33 

tists,  in  order  to  establish  the  kingdom  of 
God  with  the  help  of  the  accompanying 
deeds  of  blessing.  The  healing,  therefore, 
belongs  to  the  large  class  of  works  of  Jesus, 
which  we  shall  consider  later. 

Concerning  the  words  quoted  from  the 
story  of  Lazarus,  the  first  two  are  addressed 
to  the  disciples  who  are  not  classed  with  un- 
believers. When  at  the  resurrection  the  in- 
tention, nevertheless,  prevailed  that  the  Son 
of  God  should  be  glorified  and  the  disciples 
"come  to  believe,"  it  cannot  mean  that  they 
should  be  converted  from  unbelief  tO'  faith. 
We  are  compelled,  however,  to  affirm,  ac- 
cording to  the  synoptists,  that  absolute  faith 
is  not  a  condition  for  experiencing  a  miracle, 
but  the  direction  of  the  spirit  toward  God, 
and  the  will  aspiring  after  God,  which  on 
their  part  by  the  perception  of  the  miracle 
can  indeed  become  strengthened.  What  is 
not  clear  is  the  word  spoken  with  respect  to 
the  people  standing  by  (verse  42).  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  Johannean  discourses  of 
Jesus  offer  no  grounds  for  the  supposition 
that  Jesus  ever  insisted  that  his  miracles 
were  means  for  awakening  faith.  Only  on 
the  supposition  that  among  the  surrounding 


34  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

Jews  who  were  mostly  friends  of  Mary  and 
Martha,  the  necessary  rehgious  disposition 
existed  for  the  right  acceptance  of  the  mira- 
cle, does  the  word  spoken  with  respect  to  the 
people  conform  to  the  idea  of  Jesus,  which 
is,  moreover,  to  be  elicited  from  the  record. 
His  prayer,  that  these  people,  in  virtue  of 
this  resurrection,  might  come  to  belief  in 
his  divine  mission,  denotes  then  that  their 
yet  imperfect  faith  might  come  to  the  true 
Christian  belief  in  the  operation  of  divine 
grace. 

The  dispute  with  the  Jews,  recorded  in 
chapter  lo.  32-38  (comp.  14.  11),  admits 
also  of  no  other  conception.  When  they 
endeavored  to  stone  him  Jesus  referred  to 
the  "many  good  works  from  my  Father," 
which  he  "showed"  them.  The  "works" 
appear  here  as  the  only  refuge  which  he  has 
over  against  their  charge  of  blasphemy :  "If 
I  do  not  the  works  of  my  Father,  believe  me 
not.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye  believe  not  me, 
believe  the  works;  that  ye  may  know  and 
believe,  that  the  Father  is  in  me,  and  I  in 
him."  Did  he  therein  state  that  he  per- 
formed miracles  for  the  purpose  of  moving 
the  Jews  to  faith?     This  could  not  have 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  35 

been  the  meaning,  if  by  works  miracles  were 
to  be  understood.  For  one  must  not  over- 
look that  Jesus  makes  a  concession  here 
which,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  con- 
cession, is  far  from  making  known  his  real 
view. 

For  these  and  like  statements  in  the  Gos- 
pel of  John  it  is  very  important  that  under 
the  works  of  the  Lord  his  miracles  are  not 
to  be  understood.  True,  there  is  also  no 
reason  for  excluding  miracles  from  the  in- 
terpretation of  works;  but  they  are  not 
thought  of  as  in  the  first  place.  When  Jesus 
says  that  his  meat  consists  in  his  life-pur- 
pose, to  finish  the  work  intended  by  God 
(4.  34),  he  designates  the  discharge  of  his 
life-task  as  the  work  of  God,  namely,  his  en- 
deavor that  men  should  believe  and  obtain 
eternal  life.  And  it  means  the  same  whether 
he  speaks  of  his  Father,  or  of  his  own  work, 
whether  of  work  in  the  singular  or  of  works 
in  the  plural.  His  works  are  not  single 
miraculous  deeds  in  the  realm  of  nature,  but 
they  consist  in  bringing  about  the  kingdom 
of  God,  which  begins  on  this  side  through 
spiritual  quickening  and  shall  be  completed 
only  at  the  general  resurrection  of  the  dead 


36  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

and  the  last  judgment  (verses  20-29).  On 
this  account  he  does  not  think  of  his  mira- 
cles when  conscious  that  his  works  testify 
of  him ;  his  divine  sending  is  attested  rather 
by  his  Messianic  ministry  (verse  36). 

This  must  be  borne  in  mind  for  the  un^ 
derstanding  of  a  text  like  15.  24:  "If  I 
had  not  done  among  them  the  works  which 
none  other  man  did,  they  had  not  had  sin: 
but  now  have  they  both  seen  and  hated  both 
me  and  my  Father."  This  means  that  who- 
ever has  experienced  the  ministry  of  Jesus, 
his  preaching  of  death  and  life,  together 
with  his  bestowal  of  blessings,  without 
humbling  his  mind  and  without  opening  his 
heart  to  faith,  has  committed  the  funda- 
mental sin — unbelief.  The  "works"  of 
Jesus  produce  faith  provided  man  is  not 
impenitent.  His  miracles  in  themselves  have 
no  such  power.  That  the  miracles  are  out 
of  the  question  verse  22  proves,  where 
Jesus  mentions  his  "coming  and  speaking" 
instead  of  his  works. 

Considering  this  understanding  of  the 
words  of  Jesus,  we  find  that  the  principle  is 
expressed  more  strikingly  and  more  fre- 
quently in  John  than  in  the  synoptists  that 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  37 

the  signs  which  God  gives  to  men  are  not 
wondrous  events  in  nature  or  outward  his- 
tory but  the  Lord's  preaching  of  repentance 
and  salvation.  The  Gospel  of  John,  too,  has 
preserved  the  direct  rejection  of  all  mania 
for  miracles,  and  of  a  faith  accommodating 
itself  to  miracles.  It  is  here  most  severely 
expressed  in  the  words:  "Except  ye  see 
signs  and  wonders,  ye  will  not  believe"  (4. 
48)  ;  and  against  this  reproach  is  set  the 
praise  of  those  who  believe  without  seeing 
(20.  29).  In  general,  it  is  mere  assertion 
which  cannot  be  proved  that  in  the  fourth 
Gospel  the  miracles  play  a  greater  part  and 
are  exaggerated,  as  if  the  author  intended 
to  demonstrate  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  divine 
Logos  by  greater  miracles.  The  difference 
between  John  and  the  synoptists  on  this 
point  is  just  the  opposite.  While  the  ac- 
count of  the  synoptists  is  so  excessively 
unbiased  that  we  would  think  that 
Jesus  possessed  inherent  power  of  miracle, 
and  while  sometimes  the  idea  seems  to  be 
that  Jesus  walked  among  men  like  a  miracle- 
worker,  practicing  magic,  according  to  the 
Johannean  tradition  Jesus  refers  his  miracu- 
lous power  to  a  continual  connection  with 


38  iThe  Miracles  of  Jesus 

the  heavenly  Father  who  in  any  particular 
individual  case  consents  to  a  performance  of 
the  miracle.  Here  every  magical  idea  is  ab- 
solutely precluded.  The  personal  God  is  in 
him  with  his  own  working  and  impulse. 
The  personality  of  Jesus  becomes  thus  more 
intelligible  to  us;  it  becomes  more  lucid  to 
us  by  the  testimony  of  the  beloved  disciple 
who  understood  best  the  uniqueness  of  his 
Master. 

Very  clear — to  refer  to  it  again — is  the 
statement  made  to  the  sign-seekers  in  the 
fourth  Gospel  (6.  25,  seq.).  In  spite  of  the 
miraculous  feeding  the  people  in  their  car- 
nally religious  expectation  are  not  satisfied. 
Like  the  Pharisees  they  wish  to  see  some- 
thing very  extraordinary,  according  to  the 
synoptic  tradition,  in  connection  with  the 
healing  of  the  demoniac.  The  feeding  of 
five  thousand  people  with  a  few  loaves  is  not 
acknowledged  as  a  sign  which  proves  the 
Messiah.  Notwithstanding  this  miracle 
Jesus  is  considered  by  the  people  lower  than 
Moses,  because  the  latter  brought  bread 
down  from  heaven  visibly.  They  do  not 
consider  the  fact  that  the  fathers  also  had 
not  recognized  that  the  bread  in  the  wilder- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  39 

ness  was  a  gift  of  heaven.  The  wonder  of 
the  past  as  such  obtains  in  their  thought  a 
higher  character  than  this  miracle,  and 
their  demand  is  that  he  who  is  sent  from 
God  should  again  legitimatize  himself  by 
this,  that  he  give  them  a  sign  from  heaven. 
In  the  answer  of  Jesus  we  have  the  complete 
correlate  to  the  address  preserved  by  the 
synoptists  directed  to  the  leaders  of  the 
people  having  a  mania  for  miracles.  In 
like  tenor  Jesus  denies  that  by  the  gift  of 
Moses's  manna,  he  gave  a  sign  to  the  fathers. 
It  was  not  Moses  but  God  who  gave  the 
sign.  And  it  is  Grod  who  now  gives  in  these 
days,  continually  the  sign  which  was  once 
given  in  the  wilderness,  according  to  the 
opinion  of  the  people;  the  true,  genuine 
bread  "which  cometh  down  from  heaven, 
and  giveth  life  unto  the  world"  (verse  33). 
And  at  once  Jesus  makes  a  personal  appli- 
cation: "I  am  the  bread  of  life"  (verse  35). 
The  meaning  is,  accordingly:  *'I,  myself,  I, 
as  preacher  of  the  gospel,  as  bringer  of  life, 
am  the  sign  which  you  ask."  The  rejection 
of  the  mania  for  miracles  is  indicated  here 
just  as  in  Matt.  12.  The  true  Bread  of  Life 
by  John  and  the  Jonas'  sign  by  the  synop- 


40  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

lists  are  essentially  the  same.  "You  have 
seen  and  heard  me,"  says  the  Lord,  "and 
this  is  sufficient  that  you  should  believe 
(verse  36).  From  my  whole  person,  the 
works  and  words  which  proceed  from  me, 
everyone  must  understand,  that  my  message 
is  the  divine  truth,  the  true  religion,  and 
that  the  Father  hath  sealed  me"  (verse  27). 
It  requires  no  material  sign  to  grasp  the 
divine  truth  as  divine ;  it  needs  only  a  purely 
spiritual  penetration  to  experience  the  revela- 
tion in  a  living  manner.  We  think  here 
also  of  the  teaching  which  emphasizes  a 
sense  for  God,  and  an  endeavor  for  a  life 
founded  in  God,  as  the  principal  condition; 
and,  indeed,  as  the  only  one  for  an  under- 
standing of  the  revelation  of  God:  "If  any 
man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the 
doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God,  or  whether 
I  speak  of  myself"  (John  7.  17).  Jesus 
does  not  refer  at  all  to  the  miraculous  feed- 
ing, as  if  it  were,  perhaps,  a  sign  of  his 
origin  or  of  his  peculiar  essence  and  might 
lead  human  perception  into  the  right  path. 
Whoever  demands  phenomena — extra- 
ordinary, powerful  deeds — as  evidences  of 
the  divine  will  be  a  loser;  he  is  lacking  in 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  41 

the     principal      condition      for      religious 
knowledge. 

The  outcome  of  what  has  thus  far  been 
said  is  this :  Neither  the  Gospel  of  John  nor 
the  synoptic  Gospels  offer  a  reasonable  sup- 
port for  the  supposition  that  Jesus  per- 
formed his  miracles  in  order  to  awaken  faith 
by  them.  At  best  he  regarded  them  only  as 
the  means  of  strengthening  faith  already 
existing.  Miracles  are  the  self-evident  out- 
flow of  that  same  compassionate  love  which 
wishes  and  creates  the  kingdom  of  God,  and 
this  purpose  they  serve  only  indirectly.  In 
John's  Gospel  (9.  3)  as  well  as  in  the  first 
three  Gospels,  human  misery  appears  as  the 
factor  which  induces  Jesus  to  bring  miracu- 
lous help,  on  the  assumption  that  faith 
already  exists  which  can  esteem  his  work 
as  an  emanation  of  the  divine  love.  The  in- 
terest of  the  evangelists  in  the  miraculous 
may,  after  all,  be  different  in  both  cases ;  yet 
both  accounts  permit  us  to  perceive  with 
desirable  clearness  the  estimate  in  which 
Jesus  held  his  miracles.  There  is  yet  an- 
other trait  which  shows  in  a  peculiar  man- 
ner how  both  narratives,  notwithstanding 
various  differences,  still  supply  us  with  the 


42  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

same  religiously  important  facts.  I  refer  to 
the  parallel  of  John  6.  and  Matthew  i6.  All 
ethics  agree  that  in  both  instances  we  are  at 
the  same  historical  place.  The  feeding  is 
followed  by  the  rejection  of  the  superficial 
and  only  too  carnally-minded  Galilean 
masses.  Those  who  now  faithfully  abide 
with  Jesus  have  passed  through  a  crisis  to 
which  the  multitude  succumbed.  The  faith- 
ful have  thus  arrived  at  a  height  of  their 
religious  life.  John  transmits  to  us  a  word 
from  the  mouth  of  a  disciple,  spoken  on  this 
new  height  of  knowledge  attained  by  the 
band  of  disciples,  confessing  without  reserve 
that  the  faith  of  the  disciples  did  not  have 
its  origin  in  witnessing  miracles.  When 
many  followers  in  consequence  of  disap- 
pointed expectations  had  turned  from  the 
Master  he  asks  the  closer  circle  of  his 
twelve,  whether  they  too  would  leave  him. 
Then  Peter  answered:  "To  whom  shall  we 
go?  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life. 
And  we  have  believed  and  know  that  thou 
art  the  Holy  One  of  God"  (John  6,  67,  seq.). 
The  disciple  expresses  the  religious  experi- 
ence by  which  he  is  overpowered;  not  any 
outward  sign,  not  any  miraculous  act  has 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  43 

led  him  to  believe,  but  the  "words  of  life" 
out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord — the  gospel 
itself.  According  to  the  synoptists  Jesus, 
after  his  failure  among  the  Galilean  popu- 
lation, went  to  the  northwest,  beyond  the 
limits  of  Palestine;  and  when  in  these  days 
of  itinerancy  with  the  disciples  he  ap- 
proached Csesarea  Philippi  he  asks  his  dis- 
ciples that  remarkable  question  what  they 
thought  of  him  (Matt.  16.  13,  seq. ;  Mark  8. 
27,  seq.).  At  the  full  acknowledgment  of 
his  Messiahship,  which  Peter  makes,  Jesus 
expresses  the  same  canon  on  religious 
knowledge  which,  according  to  John,  Peter 
formulated  in  other  words.  Jesus  is  con- 
vinced that  nothing  in  the  realm  of  visible 
events,  nothing  that  belongs  to  the  sphere 
of  earthly  happenings,  has  brought  about 
the  faith  of  the  disciple.  "Flesh  and  blood 
hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my  Father 
which  is  in  heaven."  It  is  a  direct  divine 
effect  when  man  comes  to  this  condition  of 
faith.  Man  does  not  become  certain  of  the 
divine  through  influences  which  come  from 
the  life  in  flesh  and  blood,  though  such  were 
ever  so  wonderful  and  extraordinary,  but 
by  this,  that  the  source  of  the  spiritual  life 


44  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

is  opened  to  the  heart  in  the  gospel  of 
Jesus. 

Such  being  the  case,  one  might  easily  be 
led  to  think  that  according  to  the  view  of 
Jesus  the  miraculous  in  general  could  not  be 
an  object  of  faith.  But  this  would  evi- 
dently be  going  too  far.  There  is,  indeed, 
no  doubt  that  in  the  working  of  miracles  he 
gave  no  room  to  the  thought  that  they 
should  become  objects  of  faith.  Never- 
theless, it  was  not  the  thought  of  Jesus  either 
that  one  should  deny  offhand  that  his  mira- 
cles can  and  ought  to  be  believed.  Only 
they  cannot  be  objects  of  nascent  faith. 
From  a  certain  height  of  faith  only  can  one 
perceive  the  fact  and  significance  of  a  mira- 
cle. That  Jesus  wrought  wonders  is  not  to 
be  inserted  into  the  spiritual  possession  of  a 
man  who  through  a  living,  spiritual  experi- 
ence has  not  already  possessed  faith  in  the 
divine  dignity  of  Jesus. 

Jesus  himself  is  the  great  miracle,  given 
for  a  sign  to  humanity;  who,  therefore,  in 
his  sinlessness  can  dare  to  convince  all  of 
their  sinfulness,  can  dare  to  convince  all  of 
sin  and  to  call  all  to  repentance;  who,  by 
virtue  of  a   divine   authority  subjects   all 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  45 

hearts  to  himself.  This  is  Jesus's  own  dec- 
laration, and,  let  us  add,  also  the  declaration 
of  his  great  apostle  Paul.  He  traversed  the 
world  with  the  message  of  Jesus,  the  Mi- 
raculous One,  who  works  in  the  souls  of  men 
the  miracle  of  miracles.  But  nowhere  in  his 
epistles  does  he  refer  in  proof  of  it  to  a 
single  miraculous  deed  of  the  Lord,  just 
as  he  never  mentions  any  of  the  miracles 
performed  by  himself  as  recorded  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  although  he  had  oc- 
casion for  doing  so.  The  only  historical 
miracle  to  which  his  preaching  refers  is  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  from  the  dead;  but 
this  event  stands  for  him  in  the  center  of 
his  entire  view  of  life.  Beyond  this,  miracu- 
lous events  have  evidently  no  significance  for 
his  view  of  the  world,  or  for  his  religious 
experience.  He  knows  that  in  all  his  labors 
he  is  directly  under  the  miraculous  guidance 
of  Almighty  God,  and  that  he  receives  from 
the  Lord  Christ  spiritual  power  which  is 
made  perfect  in  weakness.  He  lives  with 
the  conviction  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah 
sent  of  God;  that  from  the  place  of  his 
heavenly  exaltation  he  establishes,  increases, 
preserves  the  holy  congregations  on  earth. 


46  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

He  believes  in  that  miracle  which  is  pre- 
sented to  the  world  in  Jesus  and  his  preach- 
ing, his  death  and  his  resurrection.  In  his 
missionary  labors  he  is  entirely  removed 
from  directing  attention  to  the  miraculous 
acts  of  the  Lord. 


Ill 

What  We  Can  Say  on  the  Historicity- 
OF  THE  Miracles  of  Jesus 

We  have  seen  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
are  to  be  estimated  not  only  as  a  constituent 
part  but  also  as  an  integral  part  of  his  en- 
tire Messianic  calling.  The  first  of  these 
two  questions  has  been  decided  in  the  af- 
firmative ;  miracles  make  no  break  either  in 
the  personality  or  in  the  calling  of  Jesus. 
We  turn  to  the  second  question :  What  can 
be  ascertained  purely  historically  concerning 
the  reality  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  ?  It  has 
already  been  pointed  out  that  the  question  as 
to  the  reality  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  has 
two  sides.  Here  we  do  not  deal  with  the 
question  as  to  whether  miracles  are,  on  the 
whole,  possible  and  conceivable,  but  solely 
with  the  purely  historical  question,  whether 
historical  instances  can  be  obtained  for  the 
reality  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus.  But  this 
question  also  demands  division.  In  the  first 
place,  it  comes  in  the  form  whether  any- 
thing  can   be   ascertained    relative   to   the 


48  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

reality  of  miracles  from  a  consideration  of 
the  state  of  the  gospel  tradition.  In  the 
second  place,  the  religio-historical  considera- 
tion obtrudes  itself  with  power.  Antiquity 
is  rich  in  miracles  which,  like  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  in  the  new  Testament,  are  ascribed 
both  to  heroes  of  heathenish  mythology  and 
legend,  and  also  to  truly  historical  personali- 
ties. Thus  the  problem  is  not  to  be  rejected, 
but  must  present  itself  to  every  man,  to 
every  Christian :  If  the  miracles  of  Jesus  are 
to  be  accepted  from  Christian  sources  as  his- 
torical facts,  should  one  not  jndge  with  the 
same  certainty  as  to  the  historicity  of  the 
miracles  handed  down  in  heathendom?  On 
the  other  hand :  If  we  hesitate  to  accept  the 
miracles  of  heathenism,  in  which  we  see, 
perhaps,  purely  fictitious  legend,  should  we 
not  also  deny  the  reality  of  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  ?  To  both  of  these  questions  we  now 
turn  our  attention. 

It  may  seem  that,  on  the  whole,  one  must 
concede  that  on  the  ground  of  historical  in- 
quiry he  cannot  assert  something  about  the 
reality  of  an  object  which  is  supernatural, 
and  which  therefore  lies  outside  the  circle 
of  events  which  we  call  historical.    Without 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  49 

doubt  this  is  correct;  history  can  never 
speak  the  last  word  in  such  questions.  How 
will  one  prove  the  historicity  of  a  thing 
which,  according  to  its  very  historical  con- 
nection between  cause  and  effect,  is  undis- 
cemible?  How  will  one  establish  a  miracle 
through  historical  and  literary  inquiry? 
Such  being  the  case,  the  other  is  also  im- 
possible: to  try  to  prove  the  unhistoricity 
of  the  miracle  records  of  the  Gospel  with 
the  aid  of  historical  inquiry.  For  history  as 
such  has  for  the  same  reason  no  right  to 
speak  on  that  subject.  Through  historical 
inquiry  we  may  be  able  to  find  out  instances, 
probability  arguments  for  or  against  the 
reality  of  a  recorded  miracle;  and  we  shall 
soon  see  that  from  the  gospel  records  them- 
selves a  number  of  reasons  can  be  referred 
to  for  the  historicity  of  the  miracles  which, 
just  as  far  as  historical  arguments  are  able, 
speak  in  favor  of  the  reality  of  those 
miracles. 

To  be  sure,  an  establishment  in  this  sense 
of  the  facts  for  miracles  would  be  impos- 
sible if  at  the  outset  the  credibility  of  the 
records  w^ere  as  doubtful  as  is  often  sup- 
posed; if,  in  the  "Christ-picture  of  faith," 


50  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

which  the  Gospels  offer,  nothing  else  were 
to  be  seen  than  the  picture  of  the  historical 
Jesus  adorned  with  a  rich  wreath  of  won- 
drous stories  invented  by  religious  enthusi- 
asm for  the  person  of  Jesus,  and  otherwise 
distorted  into  the  supernatural.  Where 
such  an  opinion  as  this  prevails,  the  attribu- 
ting of  miracles  to  Jesus  is  explained  as  the 
unavoidable  consequence  of  Jewish  belief  in 
Jesus's  Messianic  dignity.  In  keeping  with 
the  Jewish  Messianic  expectation,  early 
Christian  believers  simply  had  the  wondrous 
deeds  of  the  Old  Testament  men  of  God  re- 
peated and  surpassed  by  Jesus.  Thus  the 
miracles  ascribed  to  Jesus  are  criticized  away 
without  difficulty,  as  the  imputation  of  senti- 
mental belief.  A  critique  of  this  kind  neu- 
tralizes itself,  since  it  results  in  nothing  but 
the  greatest  inconsequence.  Negative  criti- 
cism gladly  accepts  those  words  of  Jesus 
which  he  delivered  to  those  demanding  a 
sign  against  the  performance  of  an  extra- 
ordinary miracle.  No  one  objects  to  the 
idea  that  this  attitude  of  Jesus  is  historical. 
But  when  it  is  to  be  inferred  from  this  that 
in  reality  Jesus  did  no  miracles,  that  he  re- 
fused to  perform  any  miracle,  negative  criti- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  51 

cism  is  forced  to  consider  all  words  of  Jesus 
which  refer  to  the  accomplishment  of  any- 
certain  miracle,  either  as  invented  or  as 
handed  down  in  the  record  completely  dis- 
torted. Discourses  of  Jesus  which  refer  to 
a  miracle  which  took  place,  or  was  to  take 
place,  are  found  in  great  number,  and  form 
the  most  important  evidence  against  the 
denial  of  miracles,  for  these  numerous  words 
would  completely  hang  in  the  air  if  the  re- 
spective miracles  had  not  taken  place.  Thus, 
for  instance,  the  words  spoken  to  the  Phari- 
sees before  the  healing  of  the  man  sick  of 
the  palsy  (Matt.  9.  5,  6).  The  record  is  so 
unique  that  one  cannot  explain  how  such 
words  could  have  been  invented  had  there 
been  no  miracle.  Think,  also,  of  the  dis- 
course which  refers  to  the  feeding  of  the 
five  thousand  (Matt.  16.  18,  seq.),  or  of  the 
answer  to  the  Baptist  (Matt.  9.  4,  seq.),  or 
of  the  discourse  on  the  Sabbath  question 
called  forth  by  healing  of  the  sick  (three 
times  according  to  the  synoptists).  The 
very  clear  historical  picture,  against  which 
no  objection  can  lie,  is  this :  that  very  extra- 
ordinary deeds  were  performed  by  Jesus 
which  only  emanated  from  his  mercy,  or 


52  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

now  and  then  were  performed  perhaps  for 
the  purpose  of  symbolizing  a  higher, 
worldly  wisdom.  At  the  same  time  it  is 
by  no  means  necessary  that  all  astonishing 
deeds  of  Jesus  are  to  be  understood  as  real 
miracles.  It  is  possible  that  a  large  number 
of  these  do  not  go  beyond  the  measure  of 
that  psycho-physical  superiority,  which  is 
also  found  in  rare  cases  among  men.  A 
great  number  of  cures  may  be  directly  par- 
alleled to  strange  cures  of  later  times.  The 
Gospels  themselves  do  not  speak  of  all  re- 
markable deeds  of  the  Lord  as  having  been 
real  miracles;  yet  we  have  a  number  of 
events,  also  of  cures,  which  can  only  be 
looked  upon  as  real  miracles. 

It  is  only  over  against  satisfying  the 
mania  for  miracles  that  Jesus  refused  to 
I  perform  miracles.  To  refuse  a  sign  is  by 
no  means  peculiar  in  the  attitude  of  Jesus. 
It  is  in  harmony  with  his  attitude  toward 
other  matters,  and  is  mainly  the  application 
of  his  fixed  purpose  to  this  special  thing. 
For  this  one  fact  is  absolutely  certain :  that 
Jesus  neither  did  nor  did  he  intend  to  answer 
to  the  Jewish  popular  expectation,  according 
to  which  the  kingdom  of  God  had  to  come 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  53 

with  observation ;  and  that  the  Messiah  had 
to  surpass  in  mighty  wonders  everything 
that  had  occurred  before.  His  whole  hfe 
was  a  continually  strained  protest  against 
this  false  popular  expectation.  But  when 
the  Gospels  mean  to  make  known  and 
describe  to  us  most  clearly  this  very  struggle 
against  the  Jewish  expectation  we  cannot 
suppose  that  they  had  yielded  at  the  same 
time  to  the  impulse  to  impute  miracles  to 
the  Lord  in  abundance.  People  who  trans- 
mit the  words  of  Jesus,  "that  no  sign  shall 
be  given  except  that  of  Jonas,"  cannot  think 
of  ascribing  to  him  whom  they  thus  make 
speak  special  miraculous  deeds. 

These  are  the  points  which  may  be  quoted 
as  instances  for  the  historical  reality  of  the 
miracles  of  Jesus.  This,  however,  cannot 
mean  that  each  recorded  miracle  is  guaran- 
teed offhand  in  its  historicity  by  such  con- 
siderations. It  is  by  no  means  precluded 
that  in  the  tradition  and  in  the  conception 
of  the  eyewitnesses  this  or  that  fact  got  out 
of  its  place,  and  that  a  certain  event  was 
perceived  and  interpreted  by  them  as  an 
absolute  miracle,  without  being  entitled  to 
such  an  estimate.     But  we  may  safely  add. 


54  iThe  Miracles  of  Jesus 

after  what  Jesus  himself  said  on  the  im- 
portance of  his  miracles,  that  it  matters  not 
I  by  any  means  whether  each  individual 
I  miraculous  deed  of  Jesus  took  place  just  so, 
land  is  to  be  understood  just  so,  as  the  nar- 
rative reads.  For  the  objective  ascertain- 
ing of  a  miracle  we  have  no  sure  means  at 
our  disposal.  On  this  or  that  event,  which 
the  first  tradition  perceived  as  miraculous, 
considerations  may  assert  themselves;  con- 
siderations, indeed,  of  a  purely  historical 
nature,  which  do  not  admit  of  a  certain 
final  decision.  But  all  this  does  not  affect 
the  general  result  to  which  we  have  come. 
The  purely  historical  use  of  the  sources 
already  brings  the  probability  to  the  line 
of  certainty  that  Jesus  performed  real 
miracles. 

Over  against  this  general  result  we  shall 
not  omit  to  picture  to  ourselves  some  reflec- 
tions against  some  miracle  records  which 
one  cannot  directly  call  unfounded.  Those 
miracles  of  Jesus  which  were  done  on  im- 
personal nature,  without  perceiving  the 
motive  of  Jesus,  or  one  otherwise  answering 
to  the  attitude  of  Jesus  have  always  caused 
special  doubt.    Such  miracles  would  include 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  55 

the  stilling  of  the  storm  at  sea,  inasmuch  as 
we  may  not  assume  that  a  real  danger  exist- 
ed for  the  occupants  of  the  boat;  and  Jesus 
himself  could  not  doubt  that  the  Father  in 
heaven  would  not  yet  put  an  end  to  his 
work.  In  this  case,  was  it  really  his  word 
which  quelled  the  storm,  and  did  he  bring  it 
about  in  order  to  comfort  the  anxious  dis- 
ciples "of  little  faith"  ?  We  well  understand 
this  question;  but  it  is  not  necessary  to  fall 
back  upon  this,  that,  on  the  supposition  of 
the  outer  circumstances,  the  ceasing  of  the 
storm  accidentally  coincided  with  his  com- 
manding word,  and  the  disciples  explained 
this  as  a  powerful  deed.  To  us  it  rather 
seems  that  it  was  not  at  all  against  the 
known  principles  of  Jesus  to  assist  in  such 
a  condition  the  little  faith  of  his  faithful  by 
powerful  interference  with  the  roaring  ele- 
ments. But  how  about  the  tribute  money 
which  he  procured,  and  of  which  Matthew 
(17.  27)  narrates?  Did  Jesus,  indeed,  have 
recourse  to  this  means  to  procure  for  him- 
self and  Peter  the  small  temple  tax,  since 
we  may  assume  that  at  Capernaum,  where 
this  otherwise  very  credible  narrative  (verses 
24,   seq.)    occurred,   many  a  friend  would 


56  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

have  offered  to  him  the  small  gift?  But, 
above  all  things,  is  not  the  supposition 
plainly  inconceivable  that  a  fish  which  snap- 
ped at  the  glittering  piece  of  money  should, 
with  the  coin  in  its  mouth,  take  the  bait? 
Nevertheless  if  the  event  took  place  accord- 
ing to  the  wording  of  the  texts,  we  have  not 
a  miracle  of  power,  but  a  case  of  the  miracu- 
lous knowledge  of  Jesus.  But  the  sugges- 
tion is  not  to  be  rejected  that  in  this  narra- 
tive, which  only  belongs  to  the  first  Gospel, 
a  shifting  of  the  picture  from  recollection 
has  taken  place.  We  should  find  it  entirely 
suitable  to  the  view  of  Jesus  when  he  said  to 
Peter  who  was  in  straits  for  the  tribute 
money :  "Catch  a  big  fish,  and  you  have  the 
necessary  money ;  that  is,  what  you  require 
in  your  calling  with  little  trouble  you  will 
certainly  not  refuse  to  the  government, 
which  has  a  right  to  demand !"  Peter  acted 
accordingly,  and  held  in  his  hands  an  object 
which  represented  the  tribute.  In  this  man- 
ner the  affair  answers  to  the  ethical  senti- 
ment of  Jesus,  whereas  the  assumption  of  a 
miraculous  procuring  of  the  tribute  money 
would  deprive  the  latter  of  its  character  and 
could  with  difficulty  only  be  brought  into 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  57 

harmony  with  the  moral  logic  of  the  Lord.^ 
This  narrative  offers  a  case  which  forces  us 
to  admit  that  the  oral  tradition  in  one  single 
occurrence  can  only  have  shaped  the  miracu- 
lous character.  The  cursing  of  the  fig  tree 
(Matt.  21.  18-21;  Mark  11.  12-14,  20-23) 
also  causes  a  difficulty.  The  withering  of 
the  tree,  according  to  Matthew,  takes  place 
at  once  before  the  eyes  of  the  disciples;  ac- 
cording to  Mark  the  friend  finds  the  accursed 
tree  dried  up  in  the  evening.  It  has  been 
pointed  out,  that  such  an  incident  cannot  take 
place  in  the  named  season,  not  in  the  Easter 
time,  since  at  this  time  no  fruits  were  to  be 
expected  on  the  tree.  Such  a  hint  is  pur- 
poseless ;  there  are  many  such  exceptions  in 
the  life  of  nature,  and  here  it  is  clearly  stated, 
at  all  events,  that  the  tree  was  covered  with 
leaves,  and  thereby  invited  search  for  fruit. 
Even  if  this  event  is  transferred  to  that 
autumn  which  Jesus  spent  at  Jerusalem,  of 
which  John  speaks  in  chapter  7,  the  main 
difficulty  is  not  yet  touched  at  all ;  for  this  is 
contained  In  the  serious  question,  whether 
it  was  worthy  of  the  hungry  Jesus  to  curse 


'The  author  here  makes  a  concession  wholly  unnecessary.^ 
Editor. 


58  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

the  tree  because  he  was  disappointed  and  to 
make  of  it  an  example  of  his  miraculous 
power?  To  say  the  least,  such  a  way  of 
acting  cannot  be  reconciled  with  the  charac- 
ter of  Jesus  as  revealed  to  us.  In  consider- 
ation of  this,  it  is  only  an  evasion  to  speak 
of  a  "symbolic  miracle,"  by  which  the  judg- 
ment which  was  to  come  over  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  was  to  be  illustrated.  Should  one 
suppose  this,  then  none  of  the  narrators  had 
understood  the  miracle,  because  neither  of 
them  has  any  reference  to  this  coming  judg- 
ment. Above  all  it  is  and  remains  remark- 
able, that  for  once  the  wondrous  power  of 
Jesus  is  used  for  a  curse,  whereas  it  is  his 
very  singularity  to  use  it  as  a  blessing.  With 
this  consideration,  the  wondrous  power  of 
the  Lord  is  by  no  means  called  into  question, 
who  could  also  naturally  have  performed  this 
miracle.  It  is  an  historic  argument,  the  ob- 
servation of  the  transmitted  portrait  of 
Jesus,  whereby  the  supposition  is  suggested 
that  we  have  to  do  here  with  a  combination 
of  an  actual  occurrence  and  a  word  of 
Jesus,  like  the  parable  of  the  fruitless  fig 
tree  narrated  only  by  Luke  (13.  6-9) .  That, 
in  this  wise,  a  miracle  record  took  root  in 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  59 

an  oral  tradition,  is  easily  understood. 
Jesus  and  his  disciples  are  near  the  city ;  he 
is  hungry,  sees  a  fig  tree  richly  covered  with 
leaves;  he  expects  to  find  some  fruit  on  it 
but  finds  it  not.  This  tree,  which  disappoint- 
ed him  in  his  just  hope,  becomes  to  him  a 
symbol  of  the  capital  which,  in  like  manner, 
disappoints  the  religious  hope;  and  he  says, 
with  reference  to  Jerusalem :  "This  fig  tree, 
not  bringing  fruit,  shall  wither,"  just  as  in 
that  parable  he  designates  Israel  as  the  fruit- 
less fig  tree,  which  is  to  be  cut  down.  These 
examples  are  not  intended  to  offer  a  sure 
decision  on  the  respective  miracle  records, 
but  that  this  only  might  become  clear :  that 
an  impartial  glance  can  meet  with  many  dif- 
ficulties which  are  fully  intelligible  and  can 
be  held  in  suspense  without  detriment  to 
belief  in  the  real,  practical  proof  of  the  true 
wondrous  power  of  Jesus. 

Let  us  turn  to  the  religio-historical  points 
of  view.  We  hereby  enter  upon  a  very  large 
and  different  territory,  in  which  we  must 
make  a  scanty  selection.  We  meet  with 
miracles  in  the  religious  and  in  the  profane 
literature  of  the  nations  in  great  multitudes, 
and  we  are  wholly  skeptical  of  such  tradition. 


6o  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

In  all  fairness  nothing  entitles  us,  who  im- 
partially measure  according  to  the  like  stan- 
dard that  which  is  historically  handed  down 
everywhere,  to  estimate  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  more  favorably.  In  a  religio-histori- 
cal  comparison  the  analogies  are  of  the  high- 
est importance,  and  in  miracle  materials  the 
analogies  are  especially  strong.  Through 
similarity  in  this  point,  the  various  religions 
seem  to  come  very  close  to  each  other.  All 
miracles  seem  to  be  written  on  the  same  line. 
Common  religio-historical  study  follows  the 
principle  to  explain  all  like  or  related  phe- 
nomena in  the  different  religions,  if  any- 
where possible,  from  like  causes ;  so  also 
miracles.  It  regards  all  religious  data  as 
subjective.  What  is  written  in  the  sacred 
codices  is  considered  as  the  product  of  re- 
ligious feeling  or  judgment.  If  it  is  sup- 
posed that  miracle  legends  originated  in  the 
desire  to  bring  the  supernatural  near  to  the 
human  mind,  and  that  on  this  account  the 
supernatural  was  added  as  an  attribute  to 
adored  heroes,  the  principle  requires  of  simi- 
larly actliated  analogy  that  all  miracles  of 
which  these  religions  speak  were  of  like 
origin;  that  is,  that  without  exception  all 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  6i 

must  be  regarded  as  the  outcome  of  imagi- 
nation to  which  there  is  no  reahty.  The  real 
motive  of  the  miracle  composing  imagination 
is  thus  seen  in  the  popular  longing  for  a 
concrete  apprehension  and  description  of 
the  supernatural,  which  is  fed  by  a  perfect 
mania  for  miracles.  From  the  state  of  the 
gospel  writings  we  have  already  pointed  out 
a  number  of  signs  which,  according  to  our 
view,  strongly  support  the  historicity  of 
several  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus.  The  trend 
of  the  criticism  which  we  oppose  is  to  shake 
conviction  in  the  historical  reality  of  the 
Gospel  miracles ;  and  over  against  the  alleged 
principle  of  the  analogy  referred  to,  a  strin- 
gent scientific  proof  that  the  miracles  of  the 
Gospels  are  of  different  origin  than  the  mira- 
cles in  foreign  religious  traditions  cannot,  of 
course,  be  brought.  This  proof  is  just  as 
little  to  be  given  absolutely  as  the  proof  for 
the  correctness  of  the  principle  of  the  an- 
alogy which  is  only  an  hypothesis.  But  no 
one  will  assert  that  this  principle,  although  it 
comprises  a  large  field,  is  of  universal 
validity.  Everyone  will  rather  admit  that 
a  limitless  multitude  of  cases  is  conceivable 
which   outwardly,    indeed,    appear   as    an- 


62  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

alogies  but  which  owe  their  existence  to  en- 
tirely different  causes ;  under  the  supposition 
of  this  possibihty  we  will  make  the  following 
observations:  Just  as  we  previously  found 
instances  for  the  historicity  of  the  miracles 
of  Jesus  according  to  the  records,  we  now 
affirm  that  the  motive  for  miracle  narratives 
must  not  be  considered  offhand  as  the  sole 
and  authoritative  reason  for  the  narrative 
without  doing  violence  to  historical  truth. 
Two  things  must  here  be  borne  in  mind.  In 
the  first  place  this  motive  cannot  be  spoken 
of  as  a  mania  for  miracles  in  a  degree  that 
it  blindly  received  everything  which  is  re- 
corded of  miraculous  things;  in  the  second 
place,  the  majority  of  the  extra-canonical 
miracles  stand  in  a  very  different  relation 
than  the  canonical. 

It  sounds  very  strange  that  today  we  can 
"no  more"  believe  in  miracles,  whereas  for- 
merly such  a  belief  was  entirely  in  its  proper 
place.  One  thing,  indeed,  seems  to  be  evi- 
dent, that  the  modern  man  in  general  is 
more  opposed  to  the  acceptance  of  a  real 
miracle  than  the  man  of  the  time  of  Jesus. 
But  we  must  not  forget  that  there  is  today 
also  a  playing  with  the  miraculous  which 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  63 

differs  little  from  the  mania  for  miracles  of 
the  past.  And,  when  among  us,  not  only 
the  desire  for  appearances  of  dead  persons 
and  communication  with  them  is  publicly 
made  known,  but  also  the  gratification  of 
this  want  is  promised,  as  it  were,  in  a  busi- 
nesslike manner,  is  the  like  desire  dictated  by 
less  mania  for  miracles  than  many  things 
which  we  estimate  so  contemptibly  in  the 
thought  of  an  age  which  in  its  naivete  had  no 
idea  of  natural  happenings  conformable  to 
law  ?  This  estimate  is  already  made  invalid 
by  the  mere  existence  of  the  notion  of  mira- 
cle. For  when  the  ancient  age  possessed  the 
idea  of  miracle  it  held  it  in  opposition  to  the 
idea  of  regular  laws  of  nature.  The  idea  of 
miracle,  be  it  ever  so  confused,  always  in- 
cludes the  thought  of  a  conflict  with  natural 
law.  Thus  it  is  also  very  remarkable  when 
one  asserts  that  the  contemporaries  of  Jesus 
were  less  strangely  affected  by  the  raising 
of  a  dead  man  than  we  moderns  would  be 
who  know  that  the  brazen  law  of  nature  re- 
tains in  death  whom  it  once  has.  The 
people  of  that  time  knew  very  well  that  the 
dead  remains  dead.  After  the  burial  of 
Lazarus,  Mary,  the  sister  of  the  deceased, 


64  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

who  was  intimately  acquainted  with  Jesus, 
is  not  prepared  for  the  idea  that  a  resurrec- 
tion is  to  takQ  place.  She,  like  those  who 
were  near  her,  thought,  indeed,  that  Jesus 
could  have  cured  the  sick  Lazarus;  but  the 
still  unprecedented  miracle  on  the  dead  they 
also  regarded  as  impossible;  and  Martha 
wished  to  prevent  the  stone  being  taken  from 
the  grave  (John  ii.  32,  37,  39).  In  the 
Octavius  of  Minucius,  Felix,  the  heathen, 
turns  to  the  Christian  and  says :  "I  cannot 
agree  to  the  return  of  the  dead  to  life,  for 
such  a  case  only  happened  once,  when  Pro- 
tesilaus,  at  the  entreaties  of  his  wife,  re- 
turned for  a  few  hours  from  the  lower 
world."  But  this  case  he  also  ascribed  to 
fictitious  legend.  A  resuscitation  of  the 
dead  is  narrated  of  the  great  Pythagorean 
philosopher  and  itinerant  preacher  Apol- 
lonius  of  Tyana,  which  he  performed  at 
Rome.  A  girl  from  a  noble  house  died  on 
the  day  of  her  wedding  and  is  carried  out. 
(By  the  way,  the  similarity  of  the  individual 
traits  with  the  Gospel  narrative  of  the  raising 
of  the  widow's  son  at  Nain  is  so  great  that 
the  Apollonius  story  looks  very  much  like 
an  intended  analogy.)      Apollonius  causes 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  65 

them  to  put  down  the  bier.  "He  touches  the 
dead,  speaks  a  few  unintelHgible  words,  and 
raises  her  from  the  frame."  The  biographer, 
Philostratus,  who  is  very  skeptical  as  to  this 
tradition,  remarks  (Vita  Apollonii,  iv.  45)  : 
"Whether  he  still  found  in  her  a  spark  of 
life  which  the  physicians  did  not  perceive — 
for  it  is  said  that  the  god  had  bedewed  her, 
and  from  her  face  ascended  a  vapor — or 
whether  he  called  back  again  the  ex- 
tinguished life  and  rekindled  it,  I  am  not 
able  to  ascertain,  nor  could  they  who  were 
present."  In  the  Octavius  mentioned 
already,  the  heathen  complains  of  the  cre- 
dulity of  former  generations,  under  whose 
fictions  the  education  of  youth  is  still  suf- 
fering :  "Our  ancestors  very  gladly  believed 
in  lies.  Without  examination  they  accepted 
as  true  even  monstrous  prodigies  like  the 
Scylla,  the  Chimera,  etc."  What  do  the 
statements  here  put  together  prove?  So 
much,  at  any  rate,  that  at  the  very  time  when 
Christianity  stepped  in  beside  all  trifling 
with  the  miraculous,  skepticism  also  was  a 
powerful  factor  in  the  mental  life,  and  en- 
deavored to  cut  the  very  ground  from  under 
the  mania  for  miracles.    Not  only  educated 


66  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

men,  like  the  alleged  authors,  behave  them- 
selves in  a  critical  manner  toward  miracles, 
but  also  the  plain  countrymen  of  Jesus  were 
by  no  means  especially  disposed  toward  un- 
precedented miraculous  events. 

But,  in  spite  of  all,  the  wonderful  stories 
\oi  former  times  eagerly  prevailed  and  were 
"readily  believed  by  the  mass.  In  the  first 
place,  probably  the  god  of  medicine  Aske- 
lepios  (or,  Latin,  ^sculapius),  the  true 
"saviour"  of  the  heathen  who,  as  the  son  of 
a  god  and  a  human  mother,  of  Apollo  and 
Koronis,  was  endowed  with  a  wonderful 
healing  power.  After  he  had  been  snatched 
away  from  the  earth  through  the  lightning 
of  Zeus,  on  account  of  his  raisings  of  the 
dead  (of  which  ten  are  recorded)  he  still 
worked  from  divine  heights,  healed  through 
the  hand  of  priests  by  means  of  medicine, 
or  recompensed  with  recovery  pilgrimages 
to  his  sanctuaries.  And  this  is  only  one  ex- 
ample. There  is  no  doubt  that  at  that  time 
also  belief  in  miracles  was  diffused  and 
a  mania  for  miracles  prevailed.  Other  in- 
stances could  be  quoted  as  supplemental; 
but  not  all  must  be  placed  to  account,  such 
as  that  miracles  were  also  ascribed  to  Roman 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  67 

emperors,  for  it  is  extremely  doubtful 
whether  the  miracles  were  at  all  believed  by 
anyone,  and  were  not,  rather,  an  official 
tune  of  the  cult  of  the  Csesars.  But  who- 
ever goes  through  history  will  find  no  reason 
to  rate  very  high  the  hunger  for  miracles  in 
the  age  of  Christ.  The  mania  for  miracles 
is  the  constant  companion  of  enlightenment ; 
it  is  always  a  powerful  factor  in  the  mental 
life,  only  the  manifestations  are  different 
now  and  then;  and  It  must  be  doubtful 
whether  among  people  who  were  educated 
after  the  pattern  of  the  wisdom  of  the  syna- 
gogue, or  who  had  at  least  felt  the  breath  of 
the  wind  from  the  wing-stroke  of  that  great 
wisdom,  that  the  disposition  to  believe  in 
miracles  had  been  exceptionally  great.  It 
is  known  that  as  never  before  the  dogma 
of  the  Almighty  God  of  creation  was  indeed 
emphasized  in  later  Judaism,  but  that  this 
belief  exclusively  referred  to  the  creating 
act  of  the  past,  whereas,  confident  belief  in 
the  God  who  is  present  in  the  history  of  his 
people,  and  in  individuals  ever  rules  and 
works,  had  receded  more  and  more.  The 
God,  whose  name  one  did  not  pronounce, 
was  also  lost  to  the  religious  feeling;  and, 


68  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

although  this  decay  of  religion  was  in  the 
first  place  a  production  of  theolog}^,  and  the 
pious  and  retired  ones  in  the  country  unin- 
fluenced by  it  found  edification  in  psalms  and 
ancient  prayers,  it  could  not  be  prevented 
that  the  deistic  view  of  the  educated  con- 
cerning the  world  and  God  encroached  on 
the  masses.  This  was  also  unavoidable,  be- 
cause the  temple  ceremonial  changed  in  the 
direction  of  the  transcendent.  From  all 
this  it  must  also  be  evident  that  the  Jewish 
generation  of  that  time  also  was  not  greatly 
disposed  to  recognize  events  as  miraculous 
works  of  God,  and  it  is  not  without  diffi- 
culty to  expect  of  the  first  Christian  genera- 
tion that  without  cogent  facts  it  twined  a 
wreath  of  divine  deeds  around  the  Saviour 
who  a  short  time  ago  still  lived  among  them, 
and  represented  these  miracles  as  the  im- 
mediate effects  of  God  himself,  as  is  done 
in  the  fourth  Gospel.  The  history  of  our 
mental  life  shows  that  In  such  situations  all 
manner  of  superstition  and  mystery  easily 
springs  up,  which  at  the  first  time  meddle 
with  the  dark  powers ;  but  this  is  something 
very  different  from  imputing  to  a  his- 
torical person  miraculous  deeds  which  are 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  69 

said  to  have  been  wrought  by  a  divine 
power  and  by  a  Divine  Being.  We  have 
enough  documents  of  that  time  pertaining  to 
superstition  and  exorcism.  At  that  time 
Jewish  exorcists  had  especially  acquired  a 
certain  reputation.  Their  formulas,  which 
contained  the  names  of  the  God  of  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  according  to  the  testimony 
of  Origen  (contra  Celsum,  iv.  33),  were 
used  by  numerous  non- Jewish  magicians; 
and  the  "Solomonic"  incantations  were  con- 
sidered as  especially  efficacious.  But  we 
need  only  to  think  once  more  of  the  Apostle! 
Paul  to  know  how  far  removed  even  the 
Pharisaically  educated  man  was  from  hav- 
ing recourse  to  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  thus 
also  to  the  tendency  of  miracle  fiction. 

If,  therefore,  the  greatest  caution  is  re- 
quired when,  according  to  the  analogy  of 
the  bulk  of  the  heathenish  miracles,  one 
wishes  to  trace  a  Gospel  miracle  to  the  mania 
for  miracles,  the  essential  difference  between 
the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  those  of  other 
heroes  must  also  be  taken  into  consideration. 
In  general,  it  is  forcible.  We  recognize  it  in 
the  first  place  by  this,  that  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  owe  their  origin  entirely  to  divine  love. 


70  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

No  real  miracle  can  be  found  in  the  Gospels 
which  was  not  a  miracle  of  mercy.  In  spite 
of  some  discrepancies  in  the  account  (Mark 
6.  56)  the  person  of  the  miracle- worker,  as 
such,  steps  back,  whereas  the  extra-cere- 
monial miracles  are  characterized  by  this, 
that  they  take  place  and  are  described  in 
glorification  of  the  miracle-worker;  and, 
though  they  are  also  not  entirely  lacking  the 
motive  of  compassionate  love,  the  person  of 
the  miracle-worker  always  stands  in  the 
foreground,  and  the  miracles  obtain  thereby 
a  certain  proper  object. 

A  few  examples  from  a  great  mass  of  ma- 
terial may  suffice.  Let  us  commence  with 
the  miracles  of  the  apocryphal  gospel  litera- 
ture, and  take  the  Gospel  of  Thomas,  which 
purposes  to  fill  the  gap  between  the  return 
of  the  carpenter's  family  from  Egypt  and 
the  first  visit  to  the  temple  by  the  child 
Jesus  at  the  age  of  twelve.  It  commenced  at 
once  with  two  miracles  of  nature.  "By  his 
mere  word,"  as  we  are  expressly  told,  Jesus, 
five  years  old,  makes  muddy  water,  with 
which  he  played,  clear ;  he  then  makes  twelve 
sparrows  of  mud.  When  a  Jew  became 
angry  because   he   thereby  desecrated  the 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  71: 

Sabbath,  and  being  rebuked  also  by  his 
father,  the  boy  proves  by  a  miracle  that  he 
did  nothing  wrong;  he  claps  his  hands  and 
calls  to  the  sparrows:  "Fly  awayl"  and  off 
they  went.  The  son  of  a  scribe,  who  causes 
the  water  to  run  out  which  little  Jesus  had 
collected  in  puddles,  he  calls  a  blockhead, 
and  impious  fellow,  and  causes  him  to  be- 
come withered.  Another  boy,  who  touches 
him  by  the  shoulder  whilst  running,  he 
causes  to  fall  down  dead,  "for  every  word  of 
his  is  a  ready  deed."  To  the  reproacher,  he 
replies  that  he  only  cures  evildoers,  but  those 
become  blind  at  once  who  reproached  him. 
In  this  way  it  goes  on.  Here  we  have  the 
grossest  contrast  to  canonical  literature. 
These  are  divine  childish  tricks  by  which  the 
person  is  to  be  exalted.  All  who  do  not 
already  perceive  the  God  in  the  child  must 
die.  The  Buddha  child  too,  is  already  won- 
derfully bright  after  his  birth.  The  newly 
born  announces  with  a  lion's  voice  his  call- 
ing: *'I  am  the  sublimest,  the  best  in  the 
world !  This  is  my  last  birth.  I  will  make 
an  end  to  birth,  age,  sickness,  death."  At 
this  follow  miracle  after  miracle.  Buddha's 
very  unique  knowledge  is  always  praised. 


72  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

Buddha  says  it  himself :  "It  is  manifest  unto 
me  what  occupies  your  mind ;  you  cannot  de- 
ceive me." 

Real  marvelous  knowledge  is  recorded 
in  numerous  cases  of  Jesus;  however,  no 
real  marvelous  knowledge  of  human  be- 
ings is  transmitted,  but,  indeed,  a  sur- 
prisingly clear  knowledge  of  human 
thoughts  and  opinions,  which,  according  to 
the  analogy,  we  are  even  able  to  comprehend, 
so  that  it  is  not  properly  miraculous.  Jesus 
only  manifests  a  foreknowledge  of  his  divine 
calling,  of  the  kingdom  of  God;  but  here, 
too,  only  in  great  lines,  refusing  the  knowl- 
edge of  details.  His  extraordinary  knowl- 
edge is  of  a  purely  prophetical  kind.  The 
knowledge  of  Buddha  is  magical,  even  the 
cures  of  Buddha  lie  also  in  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent sphere,  and  are  evidently  intended  to 
glorify  the  person  of  the  hero ;  thus  he  gives 
to  a  prince,  whose  hands  and  feet  were  cut 
off,  and  whose  prayer  he  hears  in  a  distance 
through  a  message  by  means  of  the  sacred 
formulas,  the  full  possession  of  his  members, 
and  the  healed  shows  at  once  a  superhuman 
power.  Buddha  could  also  cause  a  fearful 
earthquake  by  stamping  the  ground.     In 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  j^) 

these  traits  which  are  wanting  in  the  Jesus 
picture  of  the  Gospels,  we  feel  at  once  the 
greatness  of  the  contrast.  It  is  not  other- 
wise with  Apollonius  of  Tyana.  Like 
Buddha,  he  heals  by  special  perceptive 
means  or  charms,  ^sculapius,  too,  used 
for  his  cures  sundry  means ;  prescribed  medi- 
cine; afterward  the  patients  had  to  sleep  in 
his  temples  and  follow  the  direction  of  the 
dreams  which  they  had  there.  It  is  not  the 
divine  omnipotence  which  worked  there ;  we 
meet  with  a  jumble  of  the  sensually  natural 
and  supernatural.  Apollonius  cannot  only 
banish  a  ghost,  but  needs  the  cooperation  of 
shouting  men  ( Vita  Apollonii,  ii,  7).  When 
he  wishes  to  deliver  the  city  of  Ephesus  from 
the  pestilence  he  leads  the  inhabitants  to  the 
statue  of  Apotrapacus,  the  calamity-averting 
Hercules.  He  also  applies  a  morally  very 
doubtful  measure ;  he  causes  the  stoning  of 
an  old  man,  who  is  to  bear  the  cause  of  the 
epidemic ;  afterward,  however,  not  a  human 
corpse  but  a  big  dead  dog  Is  found  (Vita 
Apollonii,  iv,  11).  A  man  suffering  hydro- 
phobia, he  causes  to  be  cured  by  the  dog 
which  bit  him  (Ibid.,  vi.  43).  He  Is  very 
superstitious ;  he  touches  the  Incense  flames, 


74  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

when  their  flickering  seems  favorable 
(Ibid.,  i,  31).  Besides,  an  absolutely  won- 
derful knowledge  is  ascribed  to  him.  He 
knows  the  language  of  every  nation  without 
having  studied  it ;  from  small  outward  events 
he  twice  prophesies  the  short  reign  of  the 
three  soldier-emperors,  Galba,  Otho,  Vitel- 
lius.  At  Ephesus  he  suddenly  stops  in  the 
conversation  and  sees,  experiencing  it  him- 
self, how  at  the  very  minute  Domitian  is 
murdered  in  Rome  (Ibid.,  i,  19;  v,  11-13; 
viii,  26).  Of  Apollonius,  as  of  his  great 
master,  Pythagoras  (in  the  biography  com- 
posed by  Jamblichus),  it  is  reported  that  he 
was  able  to  be  in  many  places  at  one  and  the 
same  time,  or  to  transfer  himself  with  ce- 
lerity to  another  place.  Such  magic  freedom 
from  limits  of  space  and  material  existence, 
is  also  ascribed  to  Buddha. 

In  our  Gospels  such  traits  are  not  found, 
unless  one  understands  in  this  sense  the 
walking  of  Jesus  on  the  sea. 

In  conclusion,  let  us  turn  once  again  to 
an  apocryphal  writing,  the  Acts  of  Peter, 
where  the  strangest  things  are  told  of  their 
hero;  he  has  the  power  to  revive  a  pickled 
herring;  at  his  command  a  suckling  an- 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  75 

nounces  with  a  loud  voice  the  impending 
judgment  on  Simon  Magus,  and  challenges 
him  to  a  contest  in  performing  miracles. 
Even  the  contest  is  described,  and  this  very 
fact  in  its  pregnant  form,  allows  us  to  per- 
ceive the  signature  of  the  heathenish  mira- 
cle view.  The  alleged  examples  make  it 
clear  how  in  extra-canonical  sources  all  mira- 
cles are  recorded  with  the  view  of  extolling 
the  person  of  the  hero.  Like  a  contention 
for  the  divinely  glorified  person,  it  often 
affects  us,  indeed,  when  he  is  raised  beyond 
the  level  of  the  human,  whereas,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  life  of  the  respective  indi- 
vidual betrays  nothing  of  the  divine.  This 
is  the  unique  peculiarity  of  the  extra-canon- 
ical miracle  records :  that  the  miracles  do  not 
harmonize  with  the  type  of  the  acting  per- 
sons. The  superhuman  is  there  only  too 
deeply  buried  in  that  which  is  altogether  too 
human,  and  comes  forth  from  the  latter 
like  something  that  should  not  be.  When 
the  extremely  acute  Apollonius,  who  was  en- 
dowed with  superhuman  knowledge,  is  in- 
volved in  different  popular  superstitions, 
when  he  even  applies  immoral  means  in  his 
miraculous  help,  we  become  confused.    It  is 


yd  The  Miracles  of  Jesus 

bad  inconsistency  which  we  find  in  the  view 
forming  the  basis  of  such  records.  The 
heathenish  "saviours"  are  said  to  perfomi 
cures  which  defy  every  human  medical 
science ;  but  when  they  apply  to  these  divine 
deeds  the  genuinely  human  means  of  medi- 
cine, magic,  and  incantations,  ceremonial 
washings,  etc.,  this,  too,  is  an  inconsistency 
which  allows  us  to  see  how  the  whole  pic- 
ture comes  from  the  view  of  those  who  de- 
signed it.  This  inconsistency  of  view  is  not 
perceptible  in  the  Gospels.  Here,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  miracles  of  Jesus  appear  as  the 
true  consequence  of  the  entire  being  and 
calling  of  Jesus.  To  the  other  "heroes"  the 
miraculous  adheres  like  an  official  gown, 
like  an  ornament  or  insignia.  Christ's  per- 
sonal life  and  work  is  a  miracle.  They  were 
magnified  through  the  miracles ;  Christ  is  so 
great  that  the  miracle  becomes  small  in  com- 
parison with  him.*  And,  whereas  in  the 
heathen  miracle  narratives  the  heroes  act 
from  a  certain  egotistical  fullness  of  heart, 
and  gladly  exhibit  miraculous  gift,  we  find 
nothing  of  this  in  the  portrait  of  Jesus  in 
the  Gospels. 

'R.  Seeberg,  Grundwahrheiten  der  ChristlichenReligion,  p.  so. 


The  Miracles  of  Jesus  ^y 

Unspeakably  great  is  the  contrast  of  this 
simple  and  sublime  personality  with  all  world 
heroes,  all  legendary  lords  and  saviours  of 
mythology.  He,  Jesus  the  Christ  and  Lord 
of  men,  rises  above  all  and  yet  in  our  en- 
deavor to  fully  apprehend  him  he  gladly  re- 
mains in  secret  with  his  deeds  of  love  and 
service. 


BS2419 .B562 

The  miracles  of  Jesus, 

Princeton  Tiieological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00012  9785 


